That seems so incredibly logical that it is difficult to conceive of a situation in which it could be doubted. Yet in modern America we find it necessary to formalize the principle in statute. Lacking the spelling out in law someone apparently could doubt it.
Twenty-five states have some form of Castle Doctrine or "Stand Your Ground" law. Texas is one of them and following the rabble-rousing of Florida's Martin/Zimmerman engagement we get this:
Texas "Castle Doctrine" Up For Challenge
Here's a little chunk of the existing law:
The law states that a person has no duty to retreat from an attack in his home, vehicle or place of business. It provides a presumption that the force was “reasonable” if certain criteria are met, making deadly force more easily justified.Got that? "In my home, vehicle or place of business."
Now listen to what this legislator says.
Coleman said he fought the “Castle Doctrine” bill in Texas on grounds that it would have disproportionate consequences on people of color. He said Texas law already allowed the use of deadly force to defend against deadly force if one could not escape the situation. He said he plans to press for legislation to return Texas law “to a balance that values human life.”Here's a tip to representative Coleman: I'm not racially prejudiced but it seems to me that if your "people of color" stay out of my house they will be protected from any disproportionate consequences. Why are you more likely to be shot for breaking and entering my property if you are a person of color? Trust me, I will shoot you just as readily if you are white, green or purple.
And if I am in my home, where would you suggest I go to "escape the situation"?
Who elects people like this?